The Peculiar Death Of Bobby..

Excellent post RA. It's very comprehensive so it's hard to add to so I'll focus on how the LAPD, or more specifically it's Special Unit Senator
(SUS) group handled the assassination.

admission by police that they destroyed key evidence in the case, including ceiling tiles, a door jamb and thousands of photographs taken in the
Ambassador Hotel kitchen where Kennedy was shot on June 5, 1968. 2,410 Photos Burned

The results of the 1968 test firing of Sirhan's gun were missing. The test gun used for ballistics comparison and identification was destroyed.
Over 90% of the audio taped witness testimony was lost or destroyed. Of the 3470 interviews the LAPD conducted, only 301 were preserved.

Jamie Scott Enyart photographed the assassination from behind as he followed RFK. These photographs would have clearly shown if and where a second
gunman was, especially if the fatal shots came from behind RFK. LAPD officers forcibly seized his camera. He tried to get his photographs back but was
told they "were destroyed by mistake". Enyart filed a lawsuit which went to trial in 1996. This is were it gets even more bizarre:

During the trial the Los Angeles city attorney announced that the photos had been found in its Sacramento office and would be brought to the
courthouse by the courier retained by the State Archives. The following day it was announced that the courier’s briefcase, that contained the
photographs, had been stolen from the car he rented at the airport.

A ballistics expert, William W. Harper found that the bullets that hit RFK and the newsman William Weisel were fired from two different guns.

Harper was allowed access to both the RFK neck bullet (People’s Exhibit 47) and the bullet that was lodged in the abdomen of William Weisel
(People’s Exhibit 54), who was several feet behind Kennedy when both men were shot. Harper used a brand new instrument called a Hycon Balliscan
camera to measure the bullets, including the rifling patterns of the bullets, and concluded that the bullets were fired from two different
guns.

Strangely enough, you can find collaborating evidence for this at the California Secretary of State Archives website:

A 1974 hearing of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors relating to Herbert MacDonell's contention that not all bullets recovered at the
crime scene came from one gun. Included are memoranda and correspondence about jurisdiction in the matter, transcript of a Supervisor's meeting,
diagrams of bullet trajectories, correspondence with the FBI, and District Attorney Busch's comments regarding the hearing;

Notice the three letter agency, FBI, is also mentioned. Where there other three letter agencies involved? Well, how about the CIA operative David
Sánchez Morales?

Morales is alleged to have once told friends, "I was in Dallas when we got the son of a bitch, and I was in Los Angeles when we got the little
bastard"[4], presumably referring to the assassination of JFK in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963 and then the later assassination of Robert
Kennedy in Los Angeles, California on June 5, 1968.

Hey Nicolas Flamel. I have to say, you get a well deserved star from me for that post. I'm sure a breakdown of different sources, all giving
different information on the various parts of the case like that will be helpful to anyone who reads it. Thanks a bunch for taking the time to write
it up and then post!

Oh, and in regards to the source "spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk" that you added - if anyone wants to research any name involved in the JFK or the RFK as
assassination case that is certainly the website for you. They have in depth biographies listed on everyone involved and It's proven helpful and
enlightening time and time again. It's a truly great source for researchers of these cases.

Actually I pretty much needed a break from ATS for a little while, admittedly. Constant trolls and doom and gloom does take It's toll after all.

I only really started writing this thread yesterday morning but I've been researching this case, as well as the JFK case, for a while now I guess.
This is my first thread on the RFK case too and It's a case which deserves many, many, many more from myself and other posters too. It's a truly
fascinating case for sure.

Thanks for the info MY! It sure does raise more questions.
I'm going to have to agree that it is very strange to get such a sentence, to such a "bad" prison and then be let out that much early?
It doesn't make much sense.

great thread! for those of us around then, it sure takes us back, for those too young.....it's good for them to learn a little history . . you do
such a good job on these type of threads..such an interesting read!!

I have to agree with Hessling (sp) you do cover all the bases quite well. Perhaps after the world has been turned upside down on its head, you can
come to America and run for a Honest Office! I myself will be first in line to vote for you as I would truly believe, for once, we had a Open and
honest dialogue with a person representing the people.

Bless you lad, you are sure to become a wise and respected gentleman in your twilight years

Just wanted to say that before I go search through some of those links!

One very important thing to think about when trying to sort out the culprits responsible for the Kennedy assassinations . Jack Kennedy was trying to
break the Federal Reserve Banks strangle hold on the American people . The Fed Reserve is not an American institution . They are a private for profit
group of Jewish owned banks that are literally consuming America by INTEREST charged to administer our own money .Kennedy literally signed the death
certificate for the Fed . The other president that did that was Lincoln with the introduction of the GREEN BACK to finance the war . The Banksters
that now is the FED wanted 24 to 36 % interest . Thats how the Rothschilds make their money . They are said to instigate a war and then finance both
sides . Even the victor can't pay off so they have to give collateral . That could be oil rights , minerals or get to be their money providers which
is very profitable for the theif to be in charge of the bank ..

i have never seen the film of the event before. it struck me almost immediately, that he knew something bad was going to happen. he had the look and
sound of terror. his voice shook several times. he looked as if he was going to burst into tears. that's .....well i don't have words for how
strange that was to see and realize.

I'm not sure I follow exactly, are you talking about the speech Bobby made just prior to his death in the Ambassador hotel?

I've never got the impression you're speaking of which is why I ask here. He seemed perfectly calm and normal. Extremely happy if anything in fact.

yeah during the speech. watch his expressions carefuly and listen to his voice. at times it even seems like he's trying to convince himself that the
speech he's giving will have to be one he wouldn't be ashamed of in the hereafter. like he knew. i'm serious. i wonder if he received some kind
of communication that shook him up like that. he was definitely suffering. not good. not good at all.

watch his expressions carefuly and listen to his voice. at times it even seems like he's trying to convince himself that the speech he's giving
will have to be one he wouldn't be ashamed of in the hereafter. like he knew. i'm serious. i wonder if he received some kind of communication that
shook him up like that. he was definitely suffering. not good. not good at all.

Ok, I've literally just gone back and re-watched the entire speech Bobby made in the hotel and I have to admit, I'm still not seeing what you're
telling me here. In regards to him suffering like you say, well, I'm really not sure what you mean. In what would was he suffering? He's just won the
California Primary, he was exceptionally happy at this time - something noticeable from his speech I found.

In regards to his body language.. once again I don't see what you're saying. I’ve watched quite a lot of Bobby’s past speeches as well and I have
to admit, the one he made in the Ambassador hotel, his very last one, It doesn't particularly stand out. It’s in no way different for me. I thought
it was a great speech as always and he looked very focused. Certainly not worried, concerned or even frightened about anything at all.

One thing I’ve noticed about Bobby and his speeches is he’s always very funny and witty – something that isn’t even missing from this last
ever speech of his. Perhaps It’s not quite as prevalent in this one as opposed to some of his past ones but given the serious circumstances of what
he had just achieved though, It’s not particularly surprising this was quite a serious speech from him. And even so his famous humor is still
noticeable as always.

I’m sorry but to me, and once again please bear in mind I’ve literally just watched his entire speech, that nothing seems to be on his mind or out
of the ordinary. In regards to him receiving some sort of prior knowledge or any kind of information about any sort of attack or incident - I doubt
it, admittedly

Now I'm not saying you're wrong or anything like that here, especially as he very well could have been given some sort of warning, I'm just saying I
respectfully disagree.

There is no evidence Ainsworth and Tarrant had anything to do with RFK's death, directly or circumstantial. They were not in LA at the time, as far
as is known, nor did they have it in for RFK, and thus there is no motive besides.

Fantastic thoroughly researched and informative. All these things I had no idea and it's a fascinating subject of which hopefully one day the truth
will speak for itself....although too much stuff under lock and key...great post, learnt a lot!

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.